Exploring the process of aqua logistics in the Malaysian aquaculture industry - a qualitative study

Aziz, Zuraimi Abdul; Hussin, Nik Syuhailah Nik; Aziz, Nurul Ashykin Abd; Latif, Mohd Nasrulddin Abd

doi:10.17270/J.LOG.2021.551

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Exploring the process of aqua logistics in the Malaysian aquaculture industry - a qualitative study

Autorzy

Aziz Zuraimi Abdul , Hussin Nik Syuhailah Nik , Aziz Nurul Ashykin Abd , Latif Mohd Nasrulddin Abd

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17270/J.LOG.2021.551

Warianty tytułu

Analiza procesu logistyki przedsiębiorstw hodowlanych wodnych jako części aqua-przemysłu w Malezji - studium jakościowe

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Background: The production of freshwater aquaculture fish has developed quickly and being important activity. An intensive logistics system is required to handle the shipment since the aquaculture products especially aquaculture fish are perishable. The process begins right after fish farming to final consumption. It involves a large number of stakeholders as the significant effort is required to build an efficient supply chain. However, little is known about process faced by the Malaysian aquaculture entrepreneurs during the aqua logistics activities. Therefore, this study aims to address this gap by exploring this phenomenon. Methods: For methodology part, a series of 12 aquaculture companies through focus group discussion (FGD) with the entrepreneurs were done across aqua logistic business. This was done to explore the topic and refine the research questions. Results: The present study discovers that there were linkages along the value chain of aqua logistics in aquaculture industry, which provides a specific recommendation to stakeholders in managing day-to-day logistics operations. Also, the findings show four main process emerging from the qualitative study, which led to the following themes, namely: [i] procurement; [ii] production; [iii] order fulfillment; and [iv] transport and distribution. Conclusion: The adopted qualitative methodology provided rich information that will lead the future research. In brief, this study has contributed new knowledge to the existing literature in aqua logistics and will benefit the future studies.

Wstęp: Produkcja ryb słodkowodnych rozwija się szybko i zyskuje coraz większe znaczenie. Intensywny system logistyczna wymaga dobrej obsługi dostaw ze względu na łatwą podatność na psucie się oferowanych produktów. Proces zaczyna się od momentu połowu aż do dostawy do końcowego konsumenta. Obejmuje swoim zasięgiem wielu uczestników, budujących wydajny łańcuch dostaw. Aczkolwiek nadal jest mało dostępnej wiedzy na temat procesu realizowanego przez malezyjskich przedsiębiorców tej branż podczas czynności w obrębie całego łańcucha logistycznego. Celem pracy jest pogłębienie i rozszerzenie wiedzy w tym obszarze. Metody: Do badania wykorzystano grupy fokusowe 12 przedsiębiorstw związanych z badaną działalnością w celu analizy problemu. Wyniki: Prezentowane badania wykazały powiązania wartościowe pomiędzy uczestnikami łańcucha dostaw w obrębie aqua-przemysłu, które dostarczają specyficznych rekomendacji uczestnikom łańcucha w codziennych operacjach logistycznych. Dodatkowo wyodrębniono cztery główne procesy związane z następującymi obszarami: zakupy, produkcja, realizacja zamówień oraz transport i dystrybucja. Wnioski: Zastosowana metodologia jakościowa dostarczyła obfitej informacji, które będzie wykorzystana w kolejnych pracach. Rozszerza ona istniejący stan wiedzy na temat aqua-logistyki i stanowi bazę dla przyszłych badań.

Słowa kluczowe

aqua logistics distribution aquaculture tilapia transportation agro-logistics

aqua-logistyka dystrybucja hodowla ryb tilapia transport agrologistyka

Wydawca

Wyższa Szkoła Logistyki

Czasopismo

LogForum

Rocznik

2021

Tom

Vol. 17, no. 2

Strony

287--298

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 59 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Aziz Zuraimi Abdul

zuraimi@umk.edu.my

Faculty of Entrepreneurship & Business, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Locked Bag 36, Pengkalan Chepa, 16100, Kota Bahru, Kelantan, Malaysia

autor

Hussin Nik Syuhailah Nik

niksyuhailah@umk.edu.my

Faculty of Entrepreneurship & Business, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Locked Bag 36, Pengkalan Chepa, 16100, Kota Bahru, Kelantan, Malaysia

autor

Aziz Nurul Ashykin Abd

ashykin.a@umk.edu.my

Faculty of Entrepreneurship & Business, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Locked Bag 36, Pengkalan Chepa, 16100, Kota Bahru, Kelantan, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9753-3257

autor

Latif Mohd Nasrulddin Abd

nasrulddin@pmu.edu.my

Department of Information Technology and Communication, Politeknik Mukah, KM 7.5, Jalan Oya, 96400, Mukah, Sarawak, Malaysia

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4227-0570

Bibliografia

1. Alfonso-Lizarazo E.H., Montoya-Torres J.R., Gutierrez-Franco E., 2013. Modeling reverse logistics process in the agro-industrial sector: The case of the palm oil supply chain. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37, 9652-9664. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.015
2. Baah C., Jin Z., 2019. Sustainable supply chain management and organizational performance: The intermediary role of competitive advantage. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 9[1], 119-131. http://doi.org/10.5539/jms.v9n1p119
3. Ballou R.H., 2007. The evolution and future of logistics and supply chain management. Economic and Business Review, 19[4], 332-348. http://doi.org/10.1108/09555340710760152
4. Berg B.L., 2008. Qualitative Research Methods, pp. 7th Edisi. Boston: Allyn and Bacon: Pearson Education, Inc.
5. Bhatnagar A., Devi P., 2013. Water quality guidelines for the management of pond fish culture. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 3[6], 1980-2009. http://doi.org/10.6088/ijes.2013030600019
6. Borade A.B., Bansod S.V., 2007. Domain of supply chain management - a state of art. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2[4], 109-121. https://www.jotmi.org/index.php/GT/article/view/rev4
7. Bruce L. Berg., 2004. Qualitative Research Methods For Social The Sciences. [A. C. Jeff Lasser, Ed.], pp. 5th Edisi . United State of America: Pearson Education, Inc.
8. Charmaz K., 2000. Constructivist and Objectivist Grounded Theory. Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 2nd Edisi., 509-535. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.
9. Charmaz K., 2002. Grounded Theory Analysis. Handbook of Interview Research, pp. 675–694. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, Inc.
10. Charmaz K., 2005. Grounded Theory in the 21st Century: Applications for Advancing Social Justice Studies. The Sage handbook of qualitative research, pp. N.K. Denzi., 507-536. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publication Ltd.
11. Charmaz K., 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis, 2nd Edisi. Los Angeles: Sage Publication Ltd.
12. Charmaz K., 2008. Constructionism and the Grounded Theory Method. Constructionism and the Grounded Theory, Holstein, 397-412. New York,London: The Guilford Press.
13. Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing Grounded Theory. [J. Seaman, Ed.], pp. 2nd Edisi . Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publication Ltd.
14. Charmaz K., 2016. The Power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for Critical Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry 23[1]: 34-45. http://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416657105
15. Croxton K.L., 2003. The order fulfillment process. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 14[1], 19-32. http://doi.org/10.1108/09574090310806512
16. Denzin N.K., Lincoln Y.S., 2011. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. [Vicki Knight, Ed.], 4th Edisi. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication Inc.
17. Dilshad R.M., Latif M.I., 2013. Focus group interview as a tool for qualitative research: an analysis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 33[1], 191-198.
18. Finfgeld-Connett D., 2010. Generalizability and transferability of meta-synthesis research findings. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66[2], 246-254.
19. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO] 2018. National Aquaculture Sector Overview: Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/fishery/countrysector/naso_malaysia/en
20. Gagalyuk T., Hanf J., Herzlieb C., 2010. Managing supply chains successfully: an empirical testing of success of supply chain networks in the German fish sector. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section C - Food Economic, 7 [2-4], 139-150. http://doi.org/10.1080/16507541.2010.531922
21. Gani A., 2017. The logistics performance effect in international trade. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 33[4], 279-288. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.12.012
22. Gardas B., Raut R., Jagtap A.H., Narkhede B., 2019. Exploring the key performance indicators of green supply chain management in agro-industry.
23. Journal of Modelling in Management, 14, 1, 260-283. http://doi.org/10.1108/JM2-12-2017-0139
24. Glavee-Geo R., Engelseth P., 2018. Seafood export as a relationship-oriented supply network: evidence from Norwegian seafood exporters. British Food Journal, 120[4], 914-929. http://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2017-0249
25. Guritno A.D., Tanuputri M.R., 2017. Comparison of fish supply chain from aquaculture and sea catchment areas. Journal of Service Science and Management, 10[04], 353-359. http://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2017.104028
26. Hong Z., Lee C.K.M., Zhang L., 2018. Procurement risk management under uncertainty- a review. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 118[7], 1547-1574. http://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-10-2017-0469
27. Ibrahim A.B., Khan M.A., Norrakiah A.S., Fazleen I.Z., 2014. Fresh water aquaculture fish consumption in Malaysia and heavy metals risk exposure to consumers. International Food Research Journal, 21[6], 2109-2113.
28. Islam S.B., Habib M.M., 2013. Supply chain management in fishing industry: a case study. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2 [2], 40-50.
29. Jasti N.V.K., Kodali R. 2015. A critical review of lean supply chain management frameworks: proposed framework. Production Planning & Control, 26 [13], 1051-1068. http://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2015.1004563
30. Jensen T.K., Nielsen J., Larsen E.P., Clausen J., 2010. The fish industry-toward supply chain modeling. Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, 19 [3-4], 214-226. http://doi.org/10.1080/10498850.2010.508964
31. Jonkman J., Barbosa-Povoa A.P., Bloemhof J.M., 2019. Integrating harvesting decisions in the design of agro-food supply chains. European Journal of Operational Research, 276, 247-258. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.12.024
32. Lambert D.M., Cooper M.C., 2000. Issues in supply chain management. Industrial Marketing Management, 29, 65-83.
33. Lambert D.M., García-Dastugue S.J., Croxton K.L., 2005. An evaluation of processoriented supply chain management frameworks. Journal of Business Logistics, 26[1], 25-51. http://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2005.tb00193.x
34. Li X., 2014. Operations management of logistics and supply chain: issues and directions. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2014, 1-7.
35. Little D.C., Newton R.W., Beveridge M.C.M., 2016. Aquaculture: A rapidly growing and significant source of sustainable food? Status, transitions and potential. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 75 [3]: 274–286.
36. Malaysia Department of Fisheries [DOF]. 2013. Perangkaan Perikanan Tahunan 2013.
37. Malaysia Department of Fisheries [DOF]. 2017.Perangkaan Perikanan Tahunan 2017. Retrieved from https://www.dof.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/3343
38. Malaysia Department of Fisheries [DOF]. [2018]. Skim Persijilan Ladang Akuakultur Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.dof.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/2350
39. Manuj I., Mentzer J.T., 2008. Global supply chain risk management strategies. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38[3], 192-223. http://doi.org/10.1108/09600030810866986
40. Merriam S.M., 2009. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from Case Study Research in Education [3rd ed.]. San Francisco: Jossey-bass Publisher.
41. Moazzam M., Akhtar P., Garnevska E., Marr N.E., 2018. Measuring agri-food supply chain performance and risk through a new analytical framework: A case study of New Zealand dairy. Production Planning & Control, 29[15], 1258-1274. http://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1522847
42. Obiero K.O., Opiyo M.A., Munguti J.M., Orina P.S., Kyule D., Yongo E., CharoKarina H., 2014. Consumer preference and marketing of farmed Nile Tilapia [Oreochromis niloticus] and African Catfish [Clarias gariepinus] in Kenya: case study of Kirinyaga and Vihiga Counties. International Journal of Fisheries Aquatic Studies, 1[5], 67-76.
43. Ottinger M., Clauss K., Kuenzer C., 2016. Aquaculture: relevance, distribution, impacts and spatial assessments: a review. Ocean & Coastal Management, 119, 244-266. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.10.015
44. Parry K., 2004. Grounded Theory. Great Barrington: Berkshire Publishing.
45. Patton M.Q., 2002a. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, pp. 3rd Edisi. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publication, Inc.
46. Patton M.Q., 2002b. Two Decades of Developments in Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice 1[30]: 261-283.
47. Prasetyanti L.A., Simatupang T.M., 2015. A framework for service-based supply chain. Procedia Manufacturing, 4, 146-154. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.11.025
48. Rabiee F., 2004. Focus-group interview and data analysis. Paper presented at the The Proceedings of Nutrition Society. http://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2004399
49. Rodrigues V.S., Piecyk M., Potter A., McKinnon A., Naim M., Edwards J., 2010. Assessing the application of focus groups as a method for collecting data in logistics. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 13[1], 75-94. http://doi.org/10.1080/13675560903224970
50. Seung C.K., Kim D.-H., 2020. Examining supply chain for seafood industries using structural path analysis. Sustainability, 12 [5]: 1-20. http://doi.org/10.3390/su12052061
51. Sampantamit T., Ho L., Lachat C., Sutummawong N., Sorgeloos P. Goethals P., 2020. Aquaculture production and its environmental sustainability in Thailand: Challenges and potential solutions. Sustainability [Switzerland], 12 [5]: 1–17. http://doi.org/10.3390/su12052010
52. Shankar R., Gupta R., Pathak D.K., 2018. Modeling critical success factors of traceability for food logistics system. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 119, 205-222. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2018.03.006
53. Stock G.N., Greis N.P., Kasanda J.D., 2000. Enterprise logistics and supply chain structure: the role of fit. Journal of Operations Management, 18, 531-547. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00035-8
54. Strauss A.L., Corbin J.M., 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. [A. L. Strauss, Ed.]. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publication, Inc.
55. Tingman W., Jian Z., Xiaoshuan Z., 2010. Fish product quality evaluation based on temperature monitoring in cold chain. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9[37], 6146-6151.
56. Yin R.K., 2009. Case Study Reserach: Design and Methods [4th ed.]: Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
57. Zai Y.Y.M., Hadiguna R.A., Afrinaldi F, 2018. A review on success factors of logistic innovation in agro-industry International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7[49], 236-240.
58. Zhang L.L., Jiao R.J., Ma Q., 2010. Accountability-based order fulfillment process reengineering towards supply chain management: a case study at a semiconductor equipment manufacturer. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 21[2], 287-305. http://doi.org/10.1108/17410381011014413
59. Zhao M., Droge C., Stank T.P., 2017. The effects of logistics capabilities on firm performance: customer-focused versus information-focused capabilities. Journal of Business Logistics, 22[2], 91-108. http://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2001.tb00005.x

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-91bf2856-0abe-449a-9d17-07ff0835d181